SPORT CODE Version 01/04/2012… .Surely not the last… Communication from the FFESSM

The FFESSM intervened at the Ministry of Sports 13 and 14 March 2012 following the publication of the 22 February of the order of 05 January 2012

Madam, Sir, dear friends,

In a previous communication, I announced to you the intervention of the FFESSM to obtain a modification of the order of 5 January 2012, and I undertook to inform you of the answers which we obtained. That's done here.

During two appointments, one at the Minister's Office and the other at the 13 and 14 Sports Direction March 2012, I had the opportunity to present our remarks, suggestions and proposals for modifications.. I must also thank the services in question for the quality of their listening and our exchanges, even if in the last resort the arbitration that will make the Sports Directorate belongs to him totally.

Recall, if it is still needed, that following the publication of the order of 5 January 2012, and despite the corrigendum published in the Olympics 10 March 2012, some imperfections remain, including a bad structure of Nitrox skills, and a canvas unsuitable for trimix diving / heliox. Some provisions are experienced as being in opposition to the practice in the field.

Remember also, no offense to those for whom the only leitmotiv comes down to "It's the fault of the federation" which Among the difficulties, there are some that the FFESSM had already pointed at the meetings set up at the Ministry during the summer 2011 and then following the referral of the FFESSM in December 2011. As a result, I preferred to raise these items again in order to have a global document and approach to this issue.
To conclude with this development, it is therefore the FFESSM, before any other organization or trade union, which intervened and which will allow, I sincerely hope, significant improvements.

On the basis of a summary file listing the problems identified and commented on by our National Technical Commission, our experts and our project manager, I was able to discuss precisely the simple imperfections of expression, but also the real problems. and we have proposed various amendments and improvements.

It seems to me inappropriate to go into the details of these documents, in order to respect the necessary confidentiality of the work in progress at the Direction des Sports, although I decided to comment on some of them below. However, and I'm not used to announcing things recklessly, I am able to announce to you that there will shortly be a decree modifying this order of 5 January 2012, including major elements resulting from our suggestions and positions.

The date is unknown, most likely soon and before summer. In this regard, the Law applies: on April 1, 2012 it is indeed the decree of January 5, 2012 which applies BUT… for a short time!

Always in the good news, I am assured of a radical change in Nitrox abilities. These will be based on the air abilities, and of course on the knowledge of the maximum depth determined by the percentage of oxygen used.. Clearly, the Nitrox dive "limited" to 20 meters, which resulted from a poor understanding of what Nitrox is confirmed (not an ability targeting space between 20m and 60m but an ability to use any Nitrox mixture. , including Surox, on-board decoration, etc.), will only be a bad memory.

Ditto for the Trimix and Heliox joint: the qualifications of the DP in case of Trimix or Heliox diving, whether it is exploration or teaching, should look like what we had previously (Stopped 9 July 2004 coded in the CdS), the constraint of having an E4 for DP being obviously excessive in some configurations.
On the other hand, the intermediate aptitude “PTH-60” which seems unrealistic and unsuitable is the subject of a more delicate negotiation. We have produced a background document, with detailed analysis of the notion of normoxic trimix, which is called "Proposal for replacement of PTH-60 by PTH-70". The title alone sums up the request we made.

I observed that the provision aimed at limiting to 40 meters, instead of 60 meters, the skills of level 3 diver during an activity without PD in an APS establishment, is not well received. Especially since accidentology does not seem to unambiguously point out these configurations there. Would the new configuration increase security, since with DP these same divers can evolve in air in space between 40 and 60 meters?
To be objective, I must inform you that in the initial project there was no possibility of diving without PD, the idea of ​​the Legislator being that in an APS establishment, diving is ALWAYS done with PD. The depth of 40 meters is therefore in fact a compromise obtained at the time… by the FFESSM, waiting for something better. Furthermore, the responsibility of the operator of the APS establishment (the president with regard to an association) as pointed out in the decree is not a surprise. What is wrong is not so much the recalled responsibility as the excessive elements that are involved. Here too, we have issued counter-proposals.

Finally, anecdotally because it is undoubtedly a marginal subject, I said that it seems to me a shame to have forgotten the use cases of “historical” recyclers whose heritage interest is undeniable, and that 'it should be remedied.

Jean-Louis BLANCHARD
President of the FFESSM